Author: Arain, ChainCatcher

In the past few cycles, whenever Ethereum fell into "performance" In times of trouble, there are always "Ethereum killers" popping up. The “Ethereum killer” refers to the Layer 1 blockchain, and the competitor is the Layer 2 solution proposed by Ethereum.

However, since Ethereum completed the Cancun upgrade this year, the narrative volume of Ethereum Layer 2 has been higher than that of Layer 1, and has even replaced Layer 1 as the mainstream narrative. On the one hand, the competitive landscape of Layer 1 has not changed. From the perspective of market value, (excluding BTC) ETH, BNB and Solana have formed a tripartite situation, with ETH being the dominant one. On the other hand, there is a problem, that is, here Why are there almost no new Ethereum killers emerging in this cycle?

Interestingly, Ethereum also seems to be stuck in Layer 2 troubles. Token Terminal data shows that ETH Layer1 revenue has declined sharply, down 99% since March 2024. At the same time, in August this year, Multicoin Capital bombarded Ethereum Layer 2 on Bankless’s show, and then Ethereum Foundation researchers stated in an AMA that Ethereum is still exploring Layer 1, rather than relying entirely on Layer 2.

As a result, problems that had been obscured by the Layer 2 boom began to surface.

Public chain war: the past of a hundred schools of thought

Layer 1 and Layer 2 are blockchain networks at different levels, among which Layer 1 is the main chain and autonomous chain, and transactions are in It executes and confirms directly on it and provides the necessary infrastructure for the blockchain network to interact directly with users. The famous public chains Bitcoin and Ethereum are at this level.

Layer 2 is an off-chain vertical scaling solution that runs on top of layer 1 blockchains such as Ethereum to improve scalability. Popular projects on this level include Arbitrum, Optimism, etc.

It can be said that there is Layer1 first and then Layer2. With technologyWith the development and update of market awareness, in addition to these two levels of network, the blockchain ecosystem also extends to Layer 0 and Layer 3. Layer 0 refers to the underlying infrastructure on which multiple Layer 1 blockchains can be built, and Layer 3 refers to the blockchain-based application layer, including games, wallets, and other DApps.

The battle of public chains originated from Laye1. It can be said that in order to break the limitations of Bitcoin, a number of public chains began to flourish. Bitcoin was originally designed as a trustless peer-to-peer electronic cash system, and it is also a Layer 1. Security and decentralization are the biggest advantages. In order to maintain the advantages of these two characteristics, Bitcoin is not suitable for carrying too many Application and development, so the scalability is poor.

Security, decentralization and scalability are important contents of the "Blockchain Impossible Triangle" theory, which was proposed by Vitalik Buterin, the founder of Ethereum. , refers to the inability of blockchain networks to achieve security, decentralization, and scalability at the same time.

In 2015, Ethereum was officially launched. Since then, almost at the same time, other public blockchains have emerged, such as Cardano, Polkadot, etc. Among them, Ethereum has become the first widely recognized public chain with a Turing-complete programming language, filling the scalability shortcomings of Bitcoin.

But from a historical perspective, this expansion is limited. Whenever Ethereum adoption increases, the network becomes congested, and Ethereum developers are reluctant to increase throughput limits in order to avoid the risk of "centralization creep" in the protocol. Therefore, under this situation, Ethereum is also trapped in the "Impossible Triangle" problem. The most intuitive feeling is that whenever this moment comes, the use of Ethereum becomes very expensive or slows down. This is a disaster for app creators and users, but it gives competitors a chance to survive.

Incomplete statistics show that in 2018, the number of new public chains in the world exceeded 100, ushering in an era of "all chains coming together". Among them, EOS, TRON, Tezos, Cardano and other blockchains have completed fundraising activities of over US$400 million, US$200 million, US$227 million, and US$117 million respectively, becoming eye-catching projects in the market.

These public chains were once more or less dubbed "Ethereum killers" by the market, but now, some have new categories, and someAre classified as Layer0, while some are classified as Layer2.

From 2020 to 2021, public chain competition will become increasingly fierce, because not only the number continues to grow, but the public chains that have already been online are fighting to seize market share. This can be seen from the data performance of developer activities:

Solana’s developer activities increased in 2021 223%, it has become a prominent non-EVM blockchain with its proprietary consensus mechanism, emphasizing the ultimate cost-effectiveness, which has led to the rapid development of its applications. This Layer 1 blockchain is still quite competitive in the market.

NEAR has seen a 100% increase in developer activity over the same period, with its technology Nightshade designed to enable faster transaction speeds, lower costs and higher transaction volumes. Aurora’s EVM compatibility means developers can easily port their smart contracts from Ethereum to new chains.

Avalanche saw a 46% increase in developer activity during the same period. The Layer1 blockchain consists of three parallel public chains. The C chain is responsible for the functions of smart contract development, deployment, and interaction, and the C chain is compatible with EVM. The project’s validators secure the network through a proof-of-stake consensus protocol, enabling fast and low-cost transaction processing. Note that this public chain is currently classified as a Layer 0 project.

Polygon (MATIC) developer activity increased by 350% during the same period. Polygon is technically a side chain. It was initially classified as Layer 1 because the experience was close to Layer 1. Because Polygon has a Layer 1 experience and is extremely cost-effective, a large number of developers poured into Polygon to build. The current network level classification of the public chain has also changed, and is now classified as Layer2.

At the end of 2021, as the market entered violent fluctuations and leveraged funds were cleared, some public chains gradually fell behind, thus forming the current pattern.

According to Tokenterminal data, from the perspective of market value, there are only 4 public chains with a weight of more than 1%, namely BTC, ETH, BNB and Solana, which account for About 70.23%, 16.92%, 4.84% and3.84% weight.

From the perspective of the number of core developers, the only ones currently with more than 100 are Ethereum, Cosmos, internet computer and OP Mainnet, followed by Cardano, Kusama and Polkadot has a core developer group of close to 100. More developers often represent the potential of a project, because from a business perspective, public chains will compete for developer resources through incentive mechanisms and visions. With more developers, there will be more products and users.

It can be seen from the above data that the top two market shares almost monopolize the public chain market share, but the above market value ranking and developer number ranking are not consistent. There is a mismatch, which shows that there are a number of undervalued public chains in the market.

The public chains sitting on the bench: the embarrassment of Cosmos

In discussing these neglected public chains Before starting the chain, we might as well summarize the development models and competitive landscape of several mainstream public chains. Taking star projects as an example, the mainstream public chains currently recognized by developer groups and investment markets mainly include the following types and developments:

1. Multi-chain architecture :

Ethereum (ETH): As the originator of smart contract platforms, Ethereum ranks first in security, innovation and number of users, but its scalability , cost and old architecture are its disadvantages. The latest classification is Layer1+Layer2.

Polkadot (DOT): It has an advanced architecture and the support of Gavin Wood, but the cost model puts great pressure on developers, and the ecosystem is still in its infancy. The latest classification is Layer0.

Cosmos: Provides a more advanced architecture and freedom, but the organizational structure is loose, the development threshold is high, and the ecosystem is also in its infancy. The latest classification is Layer0.

Avalanche (AVAX): Sufficient funds, integrated architecture, and comprehensive ecology, but lack of interactivity between subnets and insufficient awareness of new features in the bear market. The latest classification is Layer 0.

Polygon: Sufficient funds, extensive layout, and conceptsAdvanced, but the overall network concept is unknown and new features are poorly understood in the bear market. The latest classification is Layer2.

2. Single-chain architecture:

Solana: parallel execution and minimized network communication Consumption is an innovative point, but there are problems of decentralization and node performance squeeze. Layer1 network.

Aptos: adopts optimistic execution and is developer-friendly, but if all transactions are related, the efficiency improvement will be limited. Layer1 network.

Sui: Similar to Aptos, but requires transactions to declare relevance in advance. Layer1 network.

Fuel: Focus on modularization, only the execution layer, and abandon the consensus and DA layers, but it is currently in an early stage. Layer2 network.

3. Special architecture:

Near: with sharding as the highlight, but ecological development Slower and system complexity increases. Layer1 network.

Ar: A new paradigm public chain built with storage, but its security, decentralization and market acceptance are questionable. Layer0 network.

BSC: Large traffic, sufficient funds, prosperous ecosystem, but weak technological innovation. Layer1 network.

In the view of some public chain practitioners, fierce competition may lead to many projects having to adopt conservative measures due to resource loss, narrative or hot spot changes in long-term development. Strategies, some even give up on past construction achievements, and ultimately lead to a waste of continued investment and construction of the public chain due to the failure to cater to the market. Cosmos’ current embarrassing situation can be said to be the epitome of the public chain groups that are gradually being marginalized in the competition.

As a pioneer in the development of cryptocurrency and blockchain, Cosmos builds a concept similar to "super city clusters" and pioneers the concept of "application chain" through " "Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC)" is a protocol that allows the safe and efficient exchange of information and value between different blockchains. It has a profound impact on the modular blockchain theory and the concept of blockchain sovereignty. filmring.

During Ethereum’s congestion and fee surge in 2017, Cosmos attracted a lot of attention as a scalability solution. Moreover, during the cryptocurrency bull market of 2017 to 2018, the market capitalization of Cosmos’ token ATOM was among the top twenty cryptocurrency market capitalizations.

The number of Cosmos Zones is an important indicator to measure the ecological construction of Cosmos. Zones can be understood as application chains, which are independent blockchains built based on the Cosmos SDK. These Zones can communicate with each other via IBC so that Zones and the Hub (the central node of the Cosmos ecosystem) can interact securely and facilitate cross-chain asset transfers. According to the Cosmos browser, there are currently 91 zones, 84 of which are active, which shows the success of Cosmos in ecological construction.

Today, the market value of Cosmos has fallen outside the Top50, and with the evolution of the times, its unique technical solutions can be replaced to a certain extent - Ethereum and The Rollup solution on Celestia provides developers with customization options similar to the Cosmos application chain, and has a more mature community and liquidity pool.

The Cosmos ecosystem has reached a crossroads.

Complementary advantages "Public Chain Lego" activates unpopular star public chain

The level of the blockchain ecological network can be changed, and now Cosmos has been recognized by people as A Layer0 blockchain cannot use Layer1 standards to measure Cosmos.

Layer0 aims to address scalability and interoperability more effectively by creating a more flexible infrastructure and allowing developers to launch their own dedicated blockchains Sexual issues.

The core components of Cosmos include the Cosmos SDK, IBC protocol and Tendermint consensus engine:

Cosmos SDK, an open source framework and public chain constructionThe toolkit and template library greatly reduce the difficulty for developers to develop blockchain and related applications;

IBC protocol allows different blockchains to Information exchange and interoperability allow various blockchains in the Cosmos ecosystem to form a joint network. In addition, the blockchain built using the Cosmos SDK can

Tendermint consensus engine provides an efficient and reliable consensus mechanism, making the blockchain network Nodes can reach consensus quickly and fairly;·

Among them, Cosmos SDK plays the role of helping developers quickly build blockchains from scratch. It should be noted that Cosmos provides developers with consensus mechanisms and application development tools (SDK) instead of traditional execution engines (EVM virtual machines) in order to provide developers with a higher degree of freedom and allow them to develop their own software according to their own needs. Specifications customize the operating environment and transaction types of the application chain, or even a completely independent blockchain. This means that even if it is not a Cosmos ecological project, you can still use this SDK, and projects built using this SDK can exchange tokens and values ​​with other chains in Cosmos through the IBC protocol, thereby creating a "link" with the Cosmos ecosystem. ”.

This is like a "traffic entrance". But now, there is a problem with this "entrance". In fact, the Cosmos SDK relies on the CometBFT consensus algorithm. When it was originally designed, it was not designed to target high-performance public chains, but focused more on fault tolerance. This consensus algorithm is based on the Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (pBFT) consensus algorithm of the 1990s, which seems somewhat "outdated" in today's public chain competition environment. According to industry insiders, many high-performance public chains initially considered using the Cosmos SDK to build, but during the actual operation, they found that the SDK could not meet the needs, and they finally had to switch.

These needs that the Cosmos SDK cannot meet include the following aspects:

1. Limited scalability and performance. As the number of validators increases, CometBFT performs poorly in high transaction throughput;

2. Inefficient P2P network design. This results in block proposal voting communication in large networks with fewer validatorsSignificantly slowed down;

3. Transaction ordering and status are tightly coupled within the consensus engine, which will actually limit performance and flexibility;

4. EVM compatibility issues. The lack of seamless compatibility with EVM actually excludes developers who want to use Ethereum tools or connect to the Ethereum community;

5. Verifiers can be expanded sexual restrictions. Communication and signature aggregation issues prevent the Cosmos blockchain from efficiently scaling beyond 150 active validators, limiting decentralization and network security;

6. Database Performance bottlenecks, especially in high-performance applications, affect transaction processing speed.

Continuing to use CometBFT will limit scalability, performance, and integration diversity, thereby creating business obstacles for many blockchain teams building on Cosmos, and may eventually Affect the long-term development of the Cosmos ecosystem. To push the limits, Cosmos is looking for solutions. In the recently announced SDK v2, Cosmos announced support for the new consensus engine Supernova Core.

Supernova Core is a consensus framework compatible with the Cosmos SDK and designed to directly replace CometBFT. The current problems of the Cosmos SDK have been effectively and targetedly solved:

1. The use of Boneh–Lynn–Shacham (BLS) signature aggregation enables the network to operate in more than 150 countries It still maintains high performance in the case of verifiers;

2. The hierarchical network architecture design replaces the P2P network design, which reduces delays and ensures efficient communication, thereby improving the overall Performance;

3. Based on HotStuff consensus. Compared with traditional pBFT implementation, the network can achieve up to 3 times the throughput and improve fault tolerance;

4. Fully compatible with EVM, allowing developers to enjoy With a seamless deployment experience, developers in the Cosmos ecosystem can use the Ethereum tools and ecosystem;

5. Allow transaction ordering and state processing to be separated. This architecture allows EVM execution to be independent of consensus and independently scalable, thereby optimizing performance. This may provide better flexibility in the future, and decentralization based on this Layer 2 will have better performance and higher security

Meter creates a public chain Lego model house

Supernova Core is a Layer 1 blockchain Meter for Cosmos. SDK Solutions to the problems faced. Founded in 2018, Meter is a decentralized Ethereum network expansion solution that integrates the advantages of PoW and PoS, processes transactions based on the HotStuff consensus proof of equity, and resists MEV and transaction front-running. , aiming to become a decentralized and extremely performant Ethereum side chain

Meter founder Zhu Xiaohan said that starting from 2021, Meter The team is exploring cross-chain bridges and creating many projects to make efforts on the future evolution and performance improvement of "Public Chain Lego". It is understood that the core code of the consensus engine Supernova Core supported by Cosmos has been implemented on the Meter mainnet and has been running non-stop for four years, with a peak daily transaction volume of 8 million. During the peak load period of the network, because many community verification nodes used AWS resource-constrained virtual machines, AWS once shut down about 20% of the verification nodes. In this case, Supernova Core can still ensure that the network maintains integrity and performance, showing its robustness, security and efficiency.

In the future, Supernova Core will support parallel EVM execution and optimize database I/O as improvement goals to further improve throughput, efficiency and performance, thereby enhancing User experience.

As project representatives of Layer 0 and Layer 1 respectively, this cooperation between Cosmos and Meter has undoubtedly created an excellent cooperation model for "Public Chain Lego". In this cooperation case, it can be seen that there is still a vibrant Layer0 ecosystem behind Cosmos, and the integration of the Cosmos SDK with Meter's Supernova Core is expected to add more conveniences to Cosmos ecosystem members, which helps As more new developers come to the Cosmos ecosystem.

For Meter, the demonstration effect of the cooperation case will help the market see more of Meter's proven technical capabilities, which is expected to promote Supernova Core to become the first choice for building scalable, efficient and high-performance blockchains solutions, thereby promoting wider adoption and collaboration in the blockchain community and making high-performance blockchain development easier

Whether it is a new Layer1 or an enhancement. Layer2 solution, Meter encourages industry players to use Supernova Core.

It is worth mentioning that in enhancing Layer2 solutions, Supernova Core can solve the current problem of Layer2 centralization. Discuss the Layer1 and Layer2 route, and are also worried that the existing Layer2 is not centralized enough - the centralization of the sorter will bring evil, inserted transactions, MEV The seriousness of the risk of other possible behaviors is that it has a greater potential black forest than Ethereum. The existing Layer 2 has no intention of decentralization due to the considerable income brought by the sequencer. Supernova Core can do so without impact. Provide a framework for decentralized Layer2 on the premise of increasing Layer2 revenue to ensure the long-term development of Layer2.

The Supernova Core test network will be launched at the end of this year. Let’s wait and see. Layer 1 and decentralized Layer 2 development is no longer daunting - it will be more than just a slogan

Although today's market focus is more on Layer 2, But what cannot be ignored is that Layer 2 projects are more playing games to attract liquidity and lack new value creation. The future trend will still call for a few technically powerful Layer 1 to lead the market, and as a start-up Layer 1 Layer0 will provide this breeding ground.

As a long-term participant in the market, we still need to focus on the underlying technology - Layer1, and even Laye0, where the future lies.